Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kreuzberg-Panorama.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Kreuzberg-Panorama.jpg, featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2017 at 14:45:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Panoramas
Info Instructive (see notes) panoramic view from the Kreuzberg over the Rhön Mountains. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 14:45, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
Support -- Milseburg (talk) 14:45, 20 December 2017 (UTC)- Support Yes.--Peulle (talk) 18:24, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 20:46, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
- Support Very sharp panorama photo --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:42, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
- Support -- PumpkinSky talk 22:33, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
- Support - Overall, very good and a lot of fun to "visit" at full size. I'd request for you to note in the file description approximately how many degrees the width of this panorama is. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:51, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
Done It´s about 150°. --Milseburg (talk) 13:54, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
- Weak support Sharp image with high resolution but the lighting is not optimum for this landscape and the left part really dark. I support for the documentary value with the integrated notes -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:40, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
- Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:05, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
Oppose No composition. Weather and lighting not optimal resulting in valley lacking detail in areas due to mist, and left side lots of dark trees. There's potentially a nice composition/scene just to the right of middle. Look at File:Keswick, Cumbria Panorama 1 - June 2009.jpg for an example of a panorama with composition (and File:Keswick, Cumbria Panorama 2 - June 2009.jpg for one a dusk with nice lights). This is just a wide angle sweep from high viewpoint. -- Colin (talk) 13:08, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
Comment I have read here another time that hard daylight is rejected and the light of the low sun is preferred. Based on the original greek meaning of the word Panorama as "all"+ "sight", I would like to show the whole outlook from this prominent viewpoint. Otherwise, I would have chosen as title "Kreuzberg Panorama (right part) or something else restrictive. The other images are very good, but contain no further instructive geographical information and some peaks are covered in clouds, which is not the intention of my panorama. So the comparison doesn´t work very well. --Milseburg (talk) 13:54, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
- Light is not just a property of the time of day and angle of the sun to the horizon but also the direction you and your subject are facing wrt the light. There may be areas that are lit well and areas that are in deep shadow and unfortunately this photo has a huge amount of area in deep shadow. Also the mist has combined with the sunlight on the left to make a glare that reduces contrast while not generating any photogenic cloud inversion. While the viewpoint is fairly high, it isn't high enough to get above the near trees, so they totally dominate the view. By all means take a "all around" view if you like but only occasionally will this generate a scene that truly is exceptional. I would much rather see a view chosen and selected for being interesting rather than simply because it was inevitably part of the scene as one swings the camera around. Regardless of etymology, a panorama is any scene with a wide (or tall) aspect. -- Colin (talk) 18:45, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose per Colin. Daniel Case (talk) 17:46, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose not too keen on the compo here, with much of the unpleasant naked trees taking much of the area, and the cut house. - Benh (talk) 12:45, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
- Support --Ralf Roleček 15:27, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Germany
